The Jacksonville Landing's Redevelopment Plan

[Keith-N-Jax]

Thanks much better plans laid out there. No way this happens. Would be nice though.

[finehoe]

Possible future for Jacksonville Landing unveiled

The new vision for the Jacksonville Landing includes a boutique hotel, a residential tower, ground-floor restaurants and a courtyard for events.
The redeveloped Landing would feature two five-story buildings, with ground-floor restaurants and retail, and floors two through five could be residential or office space.
On the east side of the Landing, there would be a 20-story residential tower, possibly workforce housing. On the west side would be a 10-story boutique hotel, though Wilson cautioned that those figures are preliminary.
Sleiman, who specializes in suburban retail development, said that he would bring in other developers for the hotel and resident components.
Structured parking would be built on the Downtown side of the redevelopment, on floors two through five, hidden within in the structure.

http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2014/01/15/possible-future-for-jacksonville.html?page=all

[KenFSU]

Seems like another boutique hotel would cannibalize the Trio, no?

[acme54321]

Would removing that ramp really be the best thing to do here?  Seems like it would add a lot of traffic to Laura St between the Landing and Forsyth from people trying to get on the bridge.  Either that or do a major overhaul of the one way traffic system.  Sleiman wants the ramps gone so he gets more land for free.  I don't see the ramp removal happening (even if something actually comes out of this whole proposal)

I hope the buildings in those rendering are mostly placeholders and aren't planned to look that bland.

I would rather see the Trio get money over this project.

That marina as shown is a pipe dream too considering the end of the docks look to be at the edge of the main channel coming through the bridge.

[I-10east]

This proposal(not holding my breath) > The current Landing > breezeway demo proposal. 

[tufsu1]

Removing the on and off ramps to/from Independent Drive is a good thing....but imo getting rid of the connection to Ocean Street should be a non-starter

[hightowerlover]

I do like the density achieved by the new plans and think this is a huge improvement from the previous. I just wonder what happens to the current tenants?  Seems a little pie in the sky to scrap existing functioning businesses for some loosely envisioned redevelopment. Why can't he develop the empty lot on the other side of the main st bridge first instead of always calling that space "future building". Why not build a few story parking garage with ground floor retail to at least relocate existing tenants, throw a hotel or residential 10 floors and see if this is market ready. At least then you get your parking without blasting away a tourism draw that may or may not materialize. I just fear this going south financially as soon as it's demolished and we get a new riverfront parking lot.

[David]

I work at Haskell, so it's been interesting to see the design and redesigns of this project so far. From what I can see from the inside it looks like they're talking about the financial expectations on both ends. So this is usually the part which sends those projects to the scrapboard.

This is the...3rd landing renovation  proposed in the past decade I believe?

[vicupstate]

Any word on the SF of retail and restaurants?  Any word on the number of hotel rooms?

This is obviously very preliminary and is much more appropriate/urban than what was proposed before.   I wish Sleiman had started with this proposal.  I see this as very high risk/ high reward.  My fears are 1) it will require a huge subsidy 2) it relies on too many other 'approvals' such as removing the ramps (which is a good idea, IMO) 3) There are not demostrated markets for any of the uses especially retail.  The residential demand will depend on the pricing.  Can you build new up to 20 stories for what the Strand rents for? 

I appreciate the 'go big or go home' aspect, but I would feel a lot better about it's prospects if the rest of DT was in better shape.  It has a certain 'build it and they will come' aspect to it.  If Laura Street andsurroundings were less of a ghosttown after 5, I would feel better about the viability in general.   

[pierre]

This proposal(not holding my breath) > The current Landing > breezeway demo proposal.

Agree but not holding my breath either.

[Overstreet]

I'm always amused when they want to build a marina with peirs 90 degrees to shore in the fastest and deepest current of downtown.

It would be an interesting build. I'd be real interested in the foundations since I'm somewhat familiar with every piling, rubble, beam and trash pile beneath that building.  However it does leave the easement for the 54" force main.

[Overstreet]

We are currently building 23 story apartment buildings in several metro areas, Orlando, Houston, Atlanta, Charlotte, Tampa. They are small and rents start around $1,000 per month.  It might be a stretch for retail workers.  AND they all have attached parking garages. 

[acme54321]

Removing the on and off ramps to/from Independent Drive is a good thing....but imo getting rid of the connection to Ocean Street should be a non-starter

If you're going to get rid of the ramps why not just go ahead and get rid of the Ocean St connection?  Making Main St two way again wouldnt be a bad thing.

[thelakelander]

Any word on the SF of retail and restaurants?  Any word on the number of hotel rooms?

No. The way the presentation came off to me was that this is a very conceptual plan that was created based off community input from last month's public presentation and workshops with a few DIA members. The old plan was probably more realistic of what Sleiman believes the market is.  However, a market analysis will have to be conducted in the next few months to see how realistic this concept really is.

This is obviously very preliminary and is much more appropriate/urban than what was proposed before.   I wish Sleiman had started with this proposal.  I see this as very high risk/ high reward.  My fears are 1) it will require a huge subsidy

Last night, the DIA and crowd was told not to worry about costs at this point.  However, you're right. If this is what the community wants to see, a chunk of subsidies will eventually be required.

2) it relies on too many other 'approvals' such as removing the ramps (which is a good idea, IMO)

It shouldn't be too difficult to get the Independent Drive ramps removed, especially if COJ or Sleiman is willing to pay for the removal.  I don't see FDOT providing the cash for that. However I also don't see FDOT removing the Ocean Street ramp or converting Ocean or Main to a two-way street anytime soon either. That goes against the Secretary's desire to not see auto capacity reduced on their highways.

3) There are not demostrated markets for any of the uses especially retail.  The residential demand will depend on the pricing.  Can you build new up to 20 stories for what the Strand rents for?

A market analysis will have to conducted to figure out all of these questions.  Also, according to the current Landing lease agreement, nothing can exceed the height of 75' or so on that site.

I appreciate the 'go big or go home' aspect, but I would feel a lot better about it's prospects if the rest of DT was in better shape.  It has a certain 'build it and they will come' aspect to it.  If Laura Street andsurroundings were less of a ghosttown after 5, I would feel better about the viability in general.

I believe the best thing about this plan is the demolition of the waterfront buildings to create a decent sized linear public space along the riverfront.  For all the talk about turning the old courthouse site and Shipyards into public space, this is a much better location.  A well designed space can be just as much of an anchor for additional retail and dining for whatever replaces the Landing as anything else.  With that said, I'd be truly surprised if what was shown last night isn't significantly reduced in scale after that market analysis is conducted. Nevertheless, that general footprint could easily be retained and incrementally phased in.

[mtraininjax]

Folks, according to Don Redman this project is 7-8 YEARS from completion. The Landing is in his district. He should know.

By that time the Overland Expressway will be completed. 220 Riverside will have a hotel and be thriving as the next Town Center, Shad Khan will have redeveloped the Shipyards by then, the Southside JEA generation station location will have been turned into the most amazing outdoor amphitheatre attended by thousands every year in Jax, downtown will have a US Navy warship docked on the Southside, two mayors and countless ideas on how to hide the mess at the Landing will have come and gone.

Don't get too excited, there was a man named Cameron Kuhn who came to Jacksonville and infected all who would buy into him that he would change downtown.....crickets later and an empty Barnett Bank building later....

Look at Sleiman's strip malls for an idea about the man and his "vision", many have large vacancies. He has trouble in his own pool, what makes him an expert on building something to this degree? His past results do not bode well for future results, IMO.